Posted on 12/10/2009 8:59:21 AM PST by NormsRevenge
Was Ötzi the Iceman a victim? 8-o
“The authors note that their work alone does not provide a complete picture of PCBs in the Andes, and more studies with more sampling sites are needed to better understand the movement and accumulation of PCBs in this mountain range.”
Found it. Not significant. Who pays for these studies so these guys can go out mountaineering on someone else's dime pretending to serve science? This find guarantees the next boondoggle...er grant.
Actually a good article without the GW crap. I am for cleaner air, cleaner energy, conservation, etc. This GW crap they’re ramming down our throats is worse than any pollutant. In their world, the ultra-rich can pollute all they want (how many limos and aircraft in Copenhagen right now?) while the middle to poorer classes get screwed with higher costs.
Except that most glaciers are growing.
Lead paint, DDT, black mold, radon, Africanized killer bees....
They’ll come up with some boogeyman or another to fleece American taxpayers.
I’m sure glad that we are wasting all of our resources chasing the CO2 Chimera rather than dealing with the problems that are in front of our faces. Well done GW nutsoids!
I don't think anybody remembers the boogeyman pollutant back in the 60's through the 80's. Look at the muffler on your car. It now has a catalytic converter and the big cause of it being in place was Sulfur Dioxide. SO2 was the bad thing because it also supposedly caused acid rain. So our wonderful PTB made it mandatory to have the converters put on the vehicles. Also the fuels were made low sulfur so there is no more SO2 to remove from the exhaust.
Fast forward to around 1995 and OH MY GOSH! Now we need a new monster in the air. Let's pick on CO2. I won't go into how important CO2 is to our lives. Without it we would starve to death.
Anyway here is the kicker. We still have the converters on our cars but (and the following is from Wikipedia):
Although catalytic converters are effective at removing hydrocarbons and other harmful emissions, most of exhaust gas leaving the engine through a catalytic converter is carbon dioxide (CO2),[11] one of the greenhouse gases indicated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to be a "most likely" cause of global warming.[12] Additionally, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has stated catalytic converters are a significant and growing cause of global warming, due to their release of nitrous oxide (N2O), a greenhouse gas over 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide.[13]
So the equipment we must have on our cars are causing more pollution than the ones they supposedly fix.
When is Congress going to recify this horrible travesty of environment control? Oh yeah, they depend on the EPA for information. I believe EPA stands for Every Person Asphyxiated. So we are DOOMED.
Uh-oh... maybe we should cover them with black soot and melt them.
Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve... The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.
From: Newsweek: The Cooling World (April 28, 1975)
Meet the new alarmists, same as the old alarmists.
We must act NOW!!!!!!!!
LOL!
I remember that.
Whew! PCBs you say! Does that mean we no longer have to worry about radioactivity in snow from the 1950s and 60s above ground nuke tests?
Is power plant ash from China still a worry in snow?
What about the ash from the various volcanos around the world!
Does pollution from Chicago still cause snow to turn grey?
What about all that residual DDT released by (gasp) GLOBAL WARMING!
What is next to worry about? Alar residue from sprayed apples in the 1990s?
After reading the information in the climate emails and related stories, I have no confidence in this report.
Hi tech in the hands of apes.
I's possible that knowing one part per trillion might be useful for determining adverse effects on human health; but very unlikely. With some substances, one part per million is not significant. The human brain is the best instrument for what is important.
The present hysteria with Global Warming is a case in point. A decided lack of reasoning, objectivity and a sense of what's important.
With foods, Prefessor Bruce Ames spent a lifetime debunking food scares, and defining levels of contaminants that actually matter. I hope someone similar has replaced him at University of California.
Clearly, today the caliber of science has deteriorated to the point of criminal suspicions, so this is a good subject as to where to start our return to honest science.
ONOE! ONOE!! ONOE!!!
We’re all gonna die!
Particularily those who eat snow on the summit of Aconcagua.
What’s the world coming to? First it was “Don’t eat the yellow snow!”
Now, “Don’t climb Aconcagua and eat the snow on the summit.”
It’s all sooo confusing.
This is absolutely ridiculous
They claim therefore detecting PCB’s in Andean snow half a nanogram per liter, which is 0.0000005 parts per billion. Just for comparison sake - for commercial food products, the US FDA limits PCB’s to a detectable limit of 10 parts per billion, below that, even the FDA admits they can not test accurately.
They of course want to blame this on humans, but a common forest fire in Australia putting PCB’s into the air could very well be to blame. Nothing has changed in the world - only humans ability to measure it is better.
The WORLD is always telling us how much we pollute. We banned PCBs in 1979, they WAITED until 2001.
Also, since they are banned, (and we can't undo it), what difference does it make anyway?
“How can PCBs affect my health?
Coming in contact with PCBs does not mean you will get sick or have health problems. Getting sick from being exposed to PCBs depends on: the amount of PCBs that entered your body, how long you were exposed to PCBs, and how sensitive your body is to PCBs.
In people, PCBs can affect the skin and may cause chloracne—small, pale, yellow skin lesions that may last from weeks to years. PCBs also can cause short-term changes in the activity of the liver, but without any noticeable symptoms. These liver changes are similar to those resulting from the consumption of alcoholic beverages or smoking cigarettes. Animal studies also have suggested that PCBs can affect the immune, endocrine and reproductive systems, but these effects are uncertain in humans.
Large amounts of PCBs given to laboratory animals over a short time can cause cancer. Studies of human workers exposed to high levels of PCBs for long periods have not consistently shown that PCBs cause cancer in humans. USEPA classifies PCBs as probable human carcinogens (cancer-causing chemicals), but there is no evidence that PCBs cause cancer at the low levels found in the environment.
Birth defects have been linked to mothers who have been exposed to PCBs. Developing fetuses and young children are the most vulnerable to PCBs, therefore, children and women who may become pregnant, are pregnant, or nursing should limit their exposure to PCBs. A pregnant woman can pass these chemicals to her unborn child. Mothers who eat highly contaminated fish before giving birth may have children who have slower mental development. PCBs also can be passed to a baby through breast milk. However, the significant benefits of breastfeeding far outweigh the risks. Young children also may experience developmental health effects.”
http://www.idph.state.il.us/envhealth/factsheets/polychlorinatedbiphenyls.htm
http://www.greenfacts.org/en/pcbs/l-2/5-effects-animal.htm
Now, I may have my math wrong, but what I came up with was that an average test mouse at the lowest level to show cancer, would have to eat 7 million liters of that mountain snow every day for two years to have a 50% chance of getting cancer. Is this worth worrying about?
It may also reflect a newly found capability to measure concentrations at increasingly lower levels.
Regards,
GtG
BWDIT?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.